Sturm: The Amazing TD Season of Dez Bryant

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
119,705
I think it's 8-8 or 9-7 with or without him. But, that's another topic entirely.

Not like we haven't been 8-8 before, with him.
And with a much worse OL.

If we are 9-7 with him, we are at Redskins level without him.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,463
I didn't say it was a negative at all. And the occurrence of catches that turn out to be TDs IS a meaningful stat.
No it isn't. TD's is a meaningful stat. Catches are a meaningful stat. The TD to catch ratio that you bring up is not. Your stat turns catches into a negative. Which they clearly are not. Which is why this ratio is purely retarded to throw out there.
 

DCUDoomsday

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
229
No it isn't. TD's is a meaningful stat. Catches are a meaningful stat. The TD to catch ratio that you bring up is not. Your stat turns catches into a negative. Which they clearly are not. Which is why this ratio is purely retarded to throw out there.
If the ratio of TDs to touches for a RB is relevant, it should be also for WRs, TEs - hell, TDs per pass attempt and per completion is a important stat for QBs too. It's a productivity stat. How often does your possessing the ball result in the touchdown.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,463
If the ratio of TDs to touches for a RB is relevant, it should be also for WRs, TEs - hell, TDs per pass attempt and per completion is a important stat for QBs too. It's a productivity stat. How often does your possessing the ball result in the touchdown.
:picard Jesus, you really don't get it. A touch for a RB is not the same as a catch is for a WR, which is not the same as a pass attempt for a QB. In order for a WR to make a catch he has to do something positive first. He has to get open and he has to catch the ball. Therefore the catch itself is a positive for a WR. On the other hand a RB does nothing inherently positive to get a carry and a QB does nothing inherently positive to get a pass attempt.

By the way TDs per touch isn't relevant at all for a RB either. Their TD totals are widely dependent on where they get their carries on the field. Sort of why Trent Richardson was a turd even while having 11 rushing TDs in a season.
 
Last edited:

DCUDoomsday

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
229
:picard Jesus, you really don't get it. A touch for a RB is not the same as a catch is for a WR, which is not the same as a pass attempt for a QB. In order for a WR to make a catch he has to do something positive first. He has to get open and he has to catch the ball. Therefore the catch itself is a positive for a WR. On the other hand a RB does nothing inherently positive to get a carry and a QB does nothing inherently positive to get a pass attempt.

By the way TDs per touch isn't relevant at all for a RB either. Their TD totals are widely dependent on where they get their carries on the field. Sort of why Trent Richardson was a turd even while having 11 rushing TDs in a season.
Re: The bolded. Not my fault that TDs per attempt is a relevant stat.

All I am saying is, I see more "amazing" in Clarke, Hayes and Rentzel's listed seasons than I do in any of the Dez or Owens seasons Strum lists. It's a personal opinion. I don't require anyone to agree with it.

Clarke has only 2 fewer TDs on more than 40 fewer catches. Hayes only 3 less, Rentzel only 4 less. Both also, with 40+ fewer catches.
 
Last edited:

DCUDoomsday

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
229
Let me put this another way: Dez winds up with 26 TDs on his 88 grabs, if he has Clarke's average. That's 10 more TDs. Does it matter? No and I didn't say it did. But it illustrates more "amazing," at least to me.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,463
Let me put this another way: Dez winds up with 26 TDs on his 88 grabs, if he has Clarke's average. That's 10 more TDs. Does it matter? No and I didn't say it did. But it illustrates more "amazing," at least to me.
If less catches and less yards are positives for a WR then you're right back to my point about Escobar. You must be really impressed with him from last year. He would have had 39 TDs if he had 88 catches.

Well except for the fact that it really isn't how the whole thing works, but sure be impressed by a meaningless stat.
 

NoDak

Hotlinking' sonofabitch
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
22,917
:picard Jesus, you really don't get it. A touch for a RB is not the same as a catch is for a WR, which is not the same as a pass attempt for a QB. In order for a WR to make a catch he has to do something positive first. He has to get open and he has to catch the ball. Therefore the catch itself is a positive for a WR. On the other hand a RB does nothing inherently positive to get a carry and a QB does nothing inherently positive to get a pass attempt.

By the way TDs per touch isn't relevant at all for a RB either. Their TD totals are widely dependent on where they get their carries on the field. Sort of why Trent Richardson was a turd even while having 11 rushing TDs in a season.
:lol

You've been sucked.
 

peplaw06

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
294
You've entered into the Doomsday merry go round. Get out while you can. Guy said...
That's 10 more TDs. Does it matter? No and I didn't say it did.
...and...
But it illustrates more "amazing," at least to me.
... in back to back sentences.

It doesn't matter, but it matters to him.
 
Last edited:

DCUDoomsday

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
229
If less catches and less yards are positives for a WR then you're right back to my point about Escobar. You must be really impressed with him from last year. He would have had 39 TDs if he had 88 catches.

Well except for the fact that it really isn't how the whole thing works, but sure be impressed by a meaningless stat.
The fact is, we don't know what Escobar can do. But then again, he is not a WR like the people on Strum's list are.

Shoot, does number of games matter? Clarke, Hayes and Rentzel had what, 12 games, or 14 to do what they did?
 

DCUDoomsday

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
229
You've entered into the Doomsday merry go round. Get out while you can. Guy said... ...and... ... in back to back sentences.

It doesn't matter, but it matters to him.
Does amazing matter?

See how this works? Refuse to worship Dez, get ragged on. Would be much simpler to just suspend all rational thought and go oooooh, he's sooooo great!

Like children do.
 

peplaw06

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
294
Does amazing matter?
I don't know... you said 10 more TDs didn't matter. Then you said it meant it was more amazing, which sounds like you think it matters.

Would be much simpler to just suspend all rational thought
Actually, quite the opposite. I'd prefer you to begin rational thought.
 

DCUDoomsday

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
229
I don't know... you said 10 more TDs didn't matter. Then you said it meant it was more amazing, which sounds like you think it matters.
What I said was, there is more "amazing" in the seasons Clarke, Hayes and Rentzel had especially for their era, than any of Dez's or Owens's seasons Strum lists. I also said it doesn't matter. Strum's article was straight-up Dez worship anyway. Catnip for the devotees.

Actually, quite the opposite. I'd prefer you to begin rational thought.
As soon as you begin reading above fourth grade level, you'll see reasoning.
 

peplaw06

Brand New Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2015
Messages
294
What I said was, there is more "amazing" in the seasons Clarke, Hayes and Rentzel had especially for their era, than any of Dez's or Owens's seasons Strum lists. I also said it doesn't matter. Strum's article was straight-up Dez worship anyway. Catnip for the devotees.
So which is it? Is it more amazing... or does it not matter?
 
Top Bottom